Why Farmers Should Support a Universal Basic Income
[Last updated November 15, 2022]
A Universal Basic Income (UBI) is any type of government program designed to ensure that all citizens receive enough income to cover the essential costs of living. A Negative Income Tax (NIT) is a variant of this same idea, delivered as a refundable tax incentive. There are many different possible implementations of UBI/NIT, which we will abstract over here.
We believe that farmers are among the people in society who would benefit most from implementation of a UBI/NIT, for the following three reasons.
Farmers’ income is highly variable
Farm income tends to swing wildly from year to year, due in large part to the inherent volatility of the market and the climate. A UBI/NIT would allow farmers to feel secure that in disaster years, they would at least be able to meet their basic needs. We feel that this would go a long way towards relieving the chronic stress that is inherent to the farming profession.
2. Farmers’ income is often low
Even in a good year, net farm income tends to be low. At Kaleidoscope Fruit Ranch, even though we use scientific principles to run a successful and highly productive organic orchard, the reality is that we, as farmers, consistently earn less than minimum wage for the hours we work on the farm.
We are not alone in this. In BC, approximately 48% of farmers supplement their farm income with off-farm work. As of 2022, Kaleidoscope Fruit Ranch joins this group.
If a UBI/NIT were to be implemented here, many farmers would no longer have to work off-farm jobs just to make ends meet. In theory, this means we could focus more of our time, expertise, and effort on farming.
3. A UBI/NIT would create the conditions necessary for a domestic agricultural labour force
In BC and Canada, much of the agricultural industry is entirely dependent on imported and migrant labour. Efforts to develop a domestic agricultural labour force have been mostly unsuccessful. However, we believe that implementing a UBI/NIT could change this situation.
Why is it so hard to develop a domestic labour force?
One reason is that most farms cannot afford to pay wages that are high enough to attract domestic workers. Migrant workers, in comparison, are able to come and earn wages in CAD that are much higher than wages in their home countries.
A second reason, which we think is underappreciated, is that most Canadians prefer stable employment over the seasonal employment that is characteristic of agricultural labour. It used to be extremely common for BC residents to more around and work seasonal jobs (e.g. in the early-to-mid 1900s). As time has passed, however, it has become increasingly difficult (and unaffordable) to live seasonal, nomadic, or semi-nomadic lifestyles in this province. In order for a domestic agricultural labour force to exist, our society needs to allow for the possibility of a diverse range of lifestyles.
Why would UBI/NIT help this situation?
The most common concern people have about UBI/NIT is that its implementation will result in large numbers of people leaving the labour force. (Why work, when your basic needs are met by the government?)
In fact what we see, in study after study of UBI/NIT, is not a significant shift towards unemployment, but a significant shift towards part-time employment. It turns out that when peoples’ basic needs are met through government support, many people tend to shift to part-time employment in order to fulfill various goals in their life. For some people, UBI/NIT allows them to take on caretaker roles in their families; for others, it allows them to pursue part-time education, volunteer opportunities, or development of other skills. It’s not that people don’t want to work; it’s that people want to do more than just work, and part-time employment together with UBI/NIT makes this possible.
Th potential benefit of this shift in employment-style for agriculture should be obvious. If more Canadians were able to shift to part-time employment, more Canadians should be available to help with seasonal labour on farms. Developing a domestic labour force would be much easier under the conditions fostered by UBI/NIT than it currently is.
Of course, the other part of the equation - paying higher wages to domestic agricultural workers - would still require work. For farmers to be able to pay their workers better, more of the value generated by farms needs to make it back to farmers. Farm labour is skilled labour (despite how it is commonly talked about). It should be compensated at much higher levels than we are currently capable of providing.
By Katie Sardinha
